178 THE entomologist's eecord. 



That represented in plate vi., fig. 5, is a very similar specimen, 

 but here the base of the larval Ip"; is clearly seen to be uninjured, 

 whilst no trace of the leg itself can be confidently recognised. In the 

 imago the leg parts are complete, though they are very much smaller 

 than on the opposite side, the terminal tarsal joints being very small 

 and only one claAv being clearly visible. 



I take it that in fig. 4 the amputation of the larval leg was 

 made so high up as to injure without destroying the regenerative 

 centre, Avhilst in fig. 5 this centre remained intact, and we see in 

 the imago hoAV much it was possible for it to accomplish in the one 

 moult from larva to pupa. I imagine that the moult from pupa to 

 imago does very little to the further development, the pupa being in 

 reality rather an immature imago than a previous stage in the definite 

 sense in which the larva is so, and, therefore, the development of a 

 regenerated part may take place at the pupal moult, but not at the 

 imaginal. 



No. 9 (an example not figured) is of some interest, as in this 

 case the amount of larval regeneration that has taken place is much 

 less than in pi. iv., fig. 1, yet the imaginal parts are not much less fully 

 developed than in that specimen. The larval leg is represented by 

 basal pans perfect, femur (first joint) w^ell represented, but further 

 joints are represented only by some wrinkled chitin at its extremity. 

 This is not, however, mere crust or scab, but is obviously tissue, 

 formed at a moult that has occurred since the injury, and no doubt, 

 therefore, does really represent the further joints, and may, when the 

 larva was alive, have been more distended, and really shoAved the 

 several parts, but being soft has collapsed at moult, and not un- 

 ravelled itself in my manipulations. 



In plate vi., fig. 6, amputation preceded the last larval moult, 

 the leg base is normal, and the leg itself represented by a small capsule 

 that has the base of a larval femur very recognisable as its only very 

 definite feature. On Gonin's vieAv aa'c ought here to haA'e a Avell- 

 developed leg. We liaA-e, however, a very small and someAvhat 

 anomalous structure. The trochanter, as usual, is normal, and the 

 tarsus is complete though very small ; but the femur and tibia are 

 represented by one curved piece, basally, no doubt, femur, apically 

 tibia, both because it possesses a tibial spur and because it articulates 

 Avith the tarsus. The specimen of the larval skin has the leg-piece 

 folded under, and so it is not obvious at once as in some of the other 

 specimens that have been more successfully displayed. 



These specimens demonstrate that on a larval leg being amputated 

 there arises from the structures at its base a ncAv larval leg. At first 

 of very small size, and Avith the seA^eral parts represented by very small 

 chitinous scraps, but still often perfectly recognisable as the several 

 parts of a complete leg. If this process began early enough in larval 

 life, no doubt by the last larval instar a fully formed larval leg Avould 

 be reproduced, practically identical Avith that of the other side. This 

 I have still, hoAVCA'er, to proA^e experimentally, but Avhat Ave find 

 proved is, that if by the last larval instar a leg has been reproduced 

 Avith all its parts, no matter hoAv small they may be, then the imago 

 possesses a perfect limb, though smaller in size than its neighbour. 



If the larval leg at the last instar is imperfect as to parts, then the 

 regenerated leg Avill be extremely small, the parts being as it Avere 



